Our recent article on reflective practice, "Professional Reflection: Learning through Experience", discussed the value of reflection in our Continuing Professional Development (CPD). It considered a number of professions encouraging reflective practice such as the healthcare/medical, teaching/education, and actuarial and accounting professions, and described some practical frameworks for reflection.
While collaboration and feedback are inherent in some professions, others may view reflective practice as a solitary activity. There can be value in forming your own opinions first, but at Protagion we believe strongly that working with others is fundamental to our professional development, including reflecting and discussing together.
Christopher Johns, a professor of nursing, in “Guided reflection: a narrative approach to advancing professional practice”* argued that the act of sharing reflection with a guide, colleague or mentor enables the experience to become learned knowledge at a faster rate than reflecting alone.
Read more for our brief thoughts on feedback, followed by more detailed exploration of “reflective practice discussions”, part of some professions’ CPD requirements i.e. their members are required to discuss their professional development with others. We look into who the reflective practice / diffraction discussion could be held with, the general elements of the discussion, and end with specific examples of possible questions to explore between the professional and the discussion partner.
As professionals, it’s important that we don’t see obtaining our professional qualifications as the end of our development journey, especially as we are still likely to have many decades of work ahead of us after obtaining the letters after our names. Because of this, our professions strongly emphasise that we continue developing beyond qualification, with increasing encouragement for learning over our lifetimes (‘lifelong learning’). A critical component of effective learning is identifying the goals of your desired development, which offer a reference point to compare your introspection, action and progress against.
As we race towards the end of the year, the time for performance appraisals is rapidly approaching again. They offer us the opportunity to reflect on our performance and development, as well as consider what we’d like to do differently in future. In this vein, this article explores the value of professional reflection, drawing from approaches followed across a number of professions. It considers Continuing Professional Development (CPD) and possible activities, and the shift from rules to principles and the increased flexibility for and responsibility on professionals to manage their professional development. Read more to explore different models of ‘reflective practice’, possible drawbacks, and practical frameworks to use for reflecting in a CPD context.
Our follow-on article on the topic of professional reflection ("Getting Value from Reflective Practice Discussions") then delves into feedback and discussion with others about our development, including examples of possible questions in a reflective practice discussion (or diffraction discussion, as at least one professional body calls it).
Life is full of cycles. Round and round. Over and over again… Or perhaps I just notice them more often because of my professional training?
Two elements which immediately come to mind as fundamental to actuarial training are (i) models, such as financial models, and (ii) the control cycle. A key lesson drummed into us from very early on is that models are simply representations of reality, although they can be very helpful i.e. “All models are wrong. Some are useful.” They depend heavily on the chosen structure for the model and the assumptions inputted and should be stress tested to judge where the model may help and where it may fall down.
The second element (the control cycle) permeates much of actuarial thinking as it forms the basis for how actuaries add value. The basic cycle (which in itself is a model!) consists of a series of steps:
1) Identify & Specify the Problem, taking the environment and context into account
2) Develop & Implement the Solution
3) Monitor and Respond to Experience i.e. see how things evolve, improve your understanding of the problem, and update the solution
The fundamental strength of a cyclical approach is that it repeats (rather than being linear and coming to an end once the steps have been ticked off). And, while the control cycle can seem quite analytical/quantitative/technical, it can be abstracted more broadly – more on this later.
Given my professional background and personal interests, I was naturally keen to apply the ‘cycle’ approach to the world of career development. At Protagion, our approach/philosophy is to start with Knowing Yourself, then make Improvements, and Track Your Progress, getting to know yourself better in the process and making further Improvements i.e. repeating the cycle. This mirrors the control cycle above well. Knowing yourself includes understanding your aspirations, motivators and strengths, and reflecting on your career path and goals. Improving yourself involves gathering feedback and suggestions (both self-directed and external), challenging yourself and getting guidance from mentors and coaches. Tracking your progress is to ensure that the steps you are taking move you forward towards your career goals.
While it shares similar elements, a broader approach than ours is the Personal Development Cycle. Under that cyclical model, we each have a “self concept” i.e. how we see ourselves: who we are, what we do, what we’re good at. Next, something happens (positive or negative, and it may be an uncontrolled event) – some direct examples are: illness, loss of a family member, divorce, losing a job, natural disasters, financial crises, feedback from a boss, a significant raise, moving country, starting a new business… These life experiences cause us to reflect i.e. “self examination”, which leads us to new insights e.g. a commitment to spend more time with our families, or an idea to start a new business or side hustle. We then form new “personal expectations” i.e. how we want to behave, and ideally put in place supporting motivation to help us make the changes we aim for. Where our “self development” succeeds, it leads to an updated “self concept” i.e. personal growth changes us. In effect, maturing/growing is about going through cycles of learning & updating our self concept. It is important to note too that the prompt events causing us to examine ourselves can be indirect e.g. learning from others’ experiences (such as those of mentors), or exploring our inner drives and imagining possible situations (perhaps with the support of a coach). Although not as intense, learning from others can be significantly faster than direct experience, partly because there are more opportunities to learn from and we can dive into the lessons rather than living through the pain or joy of the event itself.
Control cycles: inner and outer
Back to the actuarial control cycle: the original control cycle is analytical in nature, and has been expanded into two separate, but related, cycles by Jules Gribble and Lesley Traverso. Jules is an actuary by profession (a Fellow of the Society of Actuaries (FSA) in the US and Fellow of the Institute of Actuaries of Australia (FIAA)) and Lesley has a recruitment background and is director of Talent Insights Group in Sydney. They posit that using two separate cycles “makes it clear that it is a process... to be applied in multiple and diverse areas”. The original control cycle is used as the inner cycle, focusing on technical skills: “The steps [1-3 earlier] can be rephrased as ‘What do you want to do’, ‘Attempt to do it’ and ‘See if it worked (and if not redress the issues)’.”
The second, outer cycle looks at broader issues around the inner model, and focuses more on ‘softer’ skills which pick up on behavioural, cultural and ethical matters i.e. it covers aspects like governance, interpretation and communication, and is more strategic and qualitative in nature. It requires synthesis of models used in the inner cycle and interpretation of results in a broader context to inform decision makers. The two-cycle approach implies a blend of specialist/analytical skill and generalist/interpretative skill is important – a topic explored in our past article on Specialising vs Generalising as a Career Strategy.
Application to career management
This approach of dual levels of detail in the overall process can be applied to career management and personal development too. The inner cycle concentrates on the individual actions on a regular basis, concrete steps to take (and track) towards your career goals like a promotion or new skills to master. However, the Know, Improve, Track (in Protagion terminology) framework can be applied at an abstracted, outer level too i.e. a strategic perspective on your career, including broad concepts like purpose and meaning. Do you fully appreciate your long-term resonating goals and are your compounded short-term actions leading you to achieve them?
This post has concentrated on elements from my actuarial professional background and corollaries in career development. Do similar cycles exist in other professions? Please share your thoughts in the comments. For example, I don’t recall such cycles being part of my Chartered Financial Analyst studies (barring economic cycles) – but that may be my memory… For example, reflective practice in the medical profession is one application of steps 1-3 in a continuing professional development context. Which others have you come across in your professional experiences?